Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Quantifying unruptured giant intracranial aneurysms by measuring diameter and volume--a comparative analysis of 69 cases


Dengler, Julius; Maldaner, Nicolai; Bijlenga, Philippe; Burkhardt, Jan-Karl; Graewe, Alexander; Guhl, Susanne; Nakamura, Makoto; Hohaus, Christian; Kursumovic, Adisa; Schmidt, Nils Ole; Schebesch, Karl-Michael; Wostrack, Maria; Vajkoczy, Peter; Mielke, Dorothee (2015). Quantifying unruptured giant intracranial aneurysms by measuring diameter and volume--a comparative analysis of 69 cases. Acta Neurochirurgica, 157(3):361-368; discussion 368.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Intracranial aneurysms (IA) are usually quantified according to their largest diameter. However, volumetry has recently been increasingly conducted as well, especially in giant intracranial aneurysms (GIAs). Since so far the true value of GIA volumetry is unknown, we designed a trial to examine correlations between GIA diameter and volume with special focus on clinical implications.
METHODS Magnetic resonance imaging of 69 unruptured GIAs in 66 patients was retrospectively evaluated. The largest diameter and volume were measured. Also, potential associations to the patients' clinical conditions were examined.
RESULTS Comparing GIA sizes of our patient cohort produced different results depending on whether GIA diameter or volume was measured. Measuring the diameter identified posterior circulation GIAs as the largest ones (39.2 mm, IQR 37.3-48.3), while measuring the volume found GIAs of the MCA to be the largest ones (12.3 cm(3), IQR 7.2-27.8). A correlation of GIA diameter and volume was only found in anterior circulation GIAs, which were predominantly saccular in shape, but not in those of the posterior circulation, of which most were fusiform. Neither GIA diameter nor GIA volume but only GIA location was associated with neurological deficits.
CONCLUSION Diameter and volume measurements are not interchangeable modes of GIA quantification. Our data suggest that the idea of distinguishing different sizes of GIA may be clinically less relevant than examining their location, shape or mass effect.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Intracranial aneurysms (IA) are usually quantified according to their largest diameter. However, volumetry has recently been increasingly conducted as well, especially in giant intracranial aneurysms (GIAs). Since so far the true value of GIA volumetry is unknown, we designed a trial to examine correlations between GIA diameter and volume with special focus on clinical implications.
METHODS Magnetic resonance imaging of 69 unruptured GIAs in 66 patients was retrospectively evaluated. The largest diameter and volume were measured. Also, potential associations to the patients' clinical conditions were examined.
RESULTS Comparing GIA sizes of our patient cohort produced different results depending on whether GIA diameter or volume was measured. Measuring the diameter identified posterior circulation GIAs as the largest ones (39.2 mm, IQR 37.3-48.3), while measuring the volume found GIAs of the MCA to be the largest ones (12.3 cm(3), IQR 7.2-27.8). A correlation of GIA diameter and volume was only found in anterior circulation GIAs, which were predominantly saccular in shape, but not in those of the posterior circulation, of which most were fusiform. Neither GIA diameter nor GIA volume but only GIA location was associated with neurological deficits.
CONCLUSION Diameter and volume measurements are not interchangeable modes of GIA quantification. Our data suggest that the idea of distinguishing different sizes of GIA may be clinically less relevant than examining their location, shape or mass effect.

Statistics

Citations

2 citations in Web of Science®
2 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Additional indexing

Contributors:Giant Intracranial Aneurysm Study Group
Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > University Hospital Zurich > Clinic for Neurosurgery
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:March 2015
Deposited On:10 Jun 2015 15:19
Last Modified:08 Dec 2017 13:13
Publisher:Springer
ISSN:0001-6268
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-014-2292-5
PubMed ID:25502806

Download

Full text not available from this repository.
View at publisher